This blog entry by Brian Mendoza.The story: "Viggo Mortensen gets nude for Eastern Promises fight scene."
The analysis:
- Currently, most movie critics are giving praise to director David Cronenberg’s film, Eastern Promises. Released last Friday, the film has already become notorious for its “realistic-violence.” But what the film is even more notorious for is a 4 minute naked fight scene acted out by Viggo Mortensen. After viewing the film--which I thought was the best film of the year—I began reading articles and reviews to see what other people were saying. Sure enough, most of them (such as the link attached) had to mention the nakedness of Viggo. The news article attached gives Viggo’s insight on the scene, how women have been waiting to “strip” him down, and his background.
What I think is relevant, however, is not Viggo’s insight on the film, but how much the popular media is selling the 4 minute scene as if that is the only reason to see the film. Moreover, I think many people will indeed follow these instructions. And if people do follow these instructions then we do have proof that popular media, which connects our culture, has an influence on what we decide to do.
The fact that Naomi Watts says this scene will be remembered gives one much to ponder about. If people do indeed see this film because of a naked man and it sells well, then I am sure Adorno would agree with the strong possibility that such a scene will become standardized in mainstream rated R movies. Hollywood already plays with our sexuality by starring good-looking women and men in the movies, but director Cronenberg goes one step further (although I do not think the scene it is a deliberate intention to persuade sexuality).
Another thing to consider in relation to the article is the fact that the scene and attention is given to a man. After all the medias attention only reinforces that it is ok for a man to be fighting naked, but I am sure that the news would be more outraged if it was preformed by a woman. Even though sex and the media usually focus on women, only a man could fight off intruders naked. Thus, gender roles are prescribed. The man should be macho while the woman is passive. Full nakedness is ok for a man but a woman needs to have some sort of cover up (even if it does not cover much). One can see it is merely the subjects discussed by pop culture mediums which can guide behavior. They need only to refer to sex and we get ideas which we then try to guide.
1 comment:
Brian,
I've been looking forward to seeing this film, naked Viggo and all. An interesting analysis...I would suggest however that the politics of nudity for women vs. men don't necessarily take on the double-standard you describe, mostly because the standards around nudity are so skewed to begin with.
For women, there are two forms of nudity: breasts vs. full-frontal nudity (the latter of which is a euphemism for "visible genitalia.") The former has been uniformly acceptable in Hollywood films (as any number of either teen comedies or horror-core films can attest to). However, full-frontal remains taboo and it's usually a big deal if an actress assents to doing a full-frontal scene.
In comparison, there is only one form of nudity for men: also, full-frontal. This is already a double-standard of sorts - naked male chests don't carry a taboo with them unlike naked female chests.
Moreover, full frontal nudity in men is seemingly as - if not more - taboo given 1) the more, um, prominent display of the sex organ and 2) the potential of offending homophobic sensibilities. Therefore, when men appear naked in films, it seems to me, there is often a "bigger deal" made of it unlike, say, the baring of female breasts or even full-frontal female nudity.
One reason for this, I'd argue, is that our society is inundated by female nudity but not by male nudity, hence the difference in reaction to the two. As such, it seems unlikely that full-frontal male nudity would become standardized no matter how well 'Eastern Promises' performs - the taboo against the screening of penises is far stronger than it is against female nudity and thus it would take far more to change that social value. One movie wouldn't be enough to change that. You'd have to see dozens/hundreds of them come by to the extent where the sight of a male appendage is no longer considered "shocking."
I also think the reason you don't often see women fighting naked is more because you don't often see women fighting (to the death I mean), at all. As you note, women's bodies are typically treated as passive objects, not aggressive, violent subjects. Thus, a naked fight scene - done seriously vs. for camp value like a beer ad - would require people to overcome not just the nudity factor, but the social convention of thinking of women's bodies are the recipients of violence rather than creating violence.
No doubt though, Tarantino has some graphic naked women fighting scenes in his head somewhere.
Post a Comment